DWT: driving while textingHouse, Senate considering cell phone restrictions for driversBy Bill Davis, senior editor FEB. 19, 2010 -- Driving in South Carolina with a cell phone in hand may soon be as illegal as driving with a cold beer in your lap. Well, almost.
 A host of bills are being debated and crafted in the state House and Senate that could do everything from giving police the ability to ticket a driver $100 just for holding a handheld device to assessing just a $25 fine.
Interest in the matter has been spurred on by “wheels of death” stories in which teens and bus drivers were distracted by chatting and texting on their mobile phones and other handheld devices, according to several sources.
House boils measures into one bill
House Education staffers recently read through and boiled down six different anti-texting and cell phone bills into a single bill, House Education and Transportation Chairman Phil Owens, (R-Easley), told Statehouse Report this week.
 The single bill would ban drivers from texting and talking on the phone using hand-held communication devices. It would, however, allow drivers with mobile phones equipped with “hands free” technology to talk on the phone while driving. The House bill, which passed out of committee this week, also would create penalties for transgressors, and incorporate increased penalties for bus drivers and others behind the steering wheels of mass transit vehicles.
“Under the House bill, a driver charged with texting or using a cell phone or other hand-held device would be assessed two points on their license and be required to pay a $100 fine,” said Owens. “The second offense, the driver would again be assessed two points and $100, and so on.”
Owens said drivers could eventually lose their licenses for driving and dialing/texting.
The bill, which doesn’t differentiate between physical texting and voice-texting, will likely hit the House floor for debate next week.
Owens dismissed criticism that the bill would unfairly punish drivers who could also be as easily distracted by changing the station on the radio or drinking a soda.
“Those are momentary distractions; dialing, looking up a number and texting are all more involved processes,” said Owens.
Troopers support change
Mark Keel, who oversees the state’s troopers as director of the S.C. Department of Public Safety, agreed.
“I read a national safety study recently that said that for every six seconds a person is texting while driving, their eyes are off the road four and a half seconds,” said Keel.
Keel said that four and a half seconds was enough time for a car driving 55 mph to cover an entire football field, Including the end zones.
 That being said, Keel, standing in the subterranean Statehouse parking garage, surrounded by legislators’ cars, admitted that the first time he answered questions about “distracted driver” bills was when he was – ahem – driving at night and talking with a reporter on his cell phone.
Keel’s troopers are currently ensconced in vehicles crammed with video screens, cameras, computers and radio technology. Soon they will receive mobile data centers with more technology to further clutter their front seats.
But Keel, mindful of the research, banned texting for all his employees while driving.
Owens said that while he’s received no “push back” on enhanced penalties for bus drivers using cell phones, there’s been some grumbling about banning all handheld communication devices.
Martin is skeptical
Sen. Larry Martin (R-Pickens), who serves on his chamber’s Judiciary Committee, pushed back.
 “Any legislator in this building who says they don’t use their cell phone at night while driving home from a legislative session, is a probably isn’t telling the whole truth,” said Sen. Larry Martin (R-Pickens). “It’s just the nature of the world and the times we live in; we have to get some of our work done in the car.”
Martin said he was no fan of some of the provisions in a culled and combined companion bill that was passed by the full Judiciary Committee in the Senate earlier this week.
Martin, who introduced a “distracted driver” bill of his own last year, had no problem with the $25 fine and no points assessed provisions included in the Senate version.
What he had a problem with was that part of that bill would instruct law enforcement to pull over any driver seen with a handheld device capable of texting in their hand, ticket them, and confiscate the device.
“It’s unenforceable to ask law enforcement to read the minds of drivers,” Martin said.
The Senate bill will be on the floor agenda next week, but several bills are ahead of it.
Crystal ball: This one will be decided in conference committee later this session. There, expect enhanced penalties for bus drivers to remain and be joined by enhanced penalties, and perhaps an all-out ban, for drivers 18 and younger. The remaining fight will be over whether to ban all handheld devices from drivers’ hands. And the fight will likely be won by banning texting outright, but allowing Bluetooth phones in the front seat.
|
Scrambling on budgetThe House will be scrambling the next two weeks to clear its decks before the budget debate begins in earnest on the floor during the week of March 15-19. (The budget is expected to be back from the printer in time to be on the desks of representatives for the week of March 8-12.)
Next week, the full Ways and Means Committee will meet. A tort reform bill is out of a Judiciary subcommittee and headed to the full committee. And Speaker Bobby Harrell’s economic development bill is expected to be debated on the floor.
With the Senate’s debate on Employment Security Commission reform expected to end this week or by the end of next week, senators next will welcome a bill to preserve secret ballots for union membership. Also on tap: a yea/nay vote on the proposed tax break for a mega-mall in Jasper County, the re-emergence of cigarette tax increase debate and a bill to cap state government spending.
The highlight of the Senate’s posted agenda next week will likely be at 9 a.m. Thursday when a Judiciary subcommittee will meet in 105 Gressette to discuss a bill that would reform prison sentencing and perhaps do away with parole while creating diversionary sentencing for non-violent first-time drug offenders. Immediately following adjournment of the Senate that day, the Sentencing Reform Commission will meet in 105 Gressette.
|
Energy efficiency bill aheadLook for an energy bill backed by Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell to hit the floor of the Senate in the next few weeks. The bill would create an innovative loan program through which homeowners could borrow money to make their homes more energy efficient. The interesting wrinkle is that the loan program would be administered through the utility companies, so that homeowners could simply add the loan payments to their monthly bill, some of which would be offset by additional state tax credits.
|
Another scandal a la emailThis week saw revelation of nearly a year’s worth of love notes by GOP Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom that were sent by email to Kelly Payne, a Dutch Fork school teacher who is seeking the GOP nomination for the office of state Superintendent of Education. The emails included everything from come-ons from Eckstrom to be Payne’s sexual guinea pig, Biblical invocations (“I'm so comforted that you're a Christian. We'll be able to frolic together in Heaven one day!”), to racially questionable comments (“Just starting Guard duty so you'll be safe from Muslims today.”) Both Eckstrom and Payne have vowed to stay in their respective political races. According to media reports, Payne is divorced and Eckstrom has been separated, apparently for two years. One state senator said, under condition of anonymity, that whoever is running against Eckstrom “may need to get their act together and their bags packed.” Read more here. Snapper of the House Want to tick off House Speaker Bobby Harrell (R-Charleston)? Here’s how: Right after he does a television interview about the future of ESC reform, ask him how much of the state’s unemployment agency current woes were caused by the legislature’s decision in the past to cut the rate of money pulled from paychecks to pay into the insurance fund covering unemployment payouts. Whooo-weee! He gets real direct, real quick. “That’s a crock!” snapped Harrell this week, quoting work recently released in a Legislative Audit Council report. “The ESC lost $600,000 a day -- a day -- between June of 2000, when the agency had an $800 million surplus, and today, with its nearly $800 million deficit and federal loans propping the agency up.” Go ahead: Make his day. In related news, the House passed its version of ESC reform, which included splitting the agency’s duties with another, newly-created, office.
|
Balanced budgeting approach can help legislatorsBy Andy Brack, editor and publisher FEB. 19, 2010 – Raising taxes in a down economy sounds counterintuitive, but it is a viable strategy that may be better than simply cutting spending, according to a new report on budget strategies.
 Merely cutting spending as a budget solution can be harmful, writes Iris Lav of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington. Why? Because it cuts services that people really need such as meals-on-wheels for seniors and some school programs. School hours are cut. College aid is tougher to get. Layoffs and contract cuts cause rippling impacts to the economy. With less money spent on services or salaries, there’s less money floating around, which reduces demand from the economy, the report says.
“The anti-tax argument does not take into account the reality that cuts in spending are problematic policies during an economic downturn because they can make the downturn deeper in the state,” Lav writes. She admits tax increases also can reduce demand in the economy, but not to as much of a degree in the short run – particularly if taxes are on higher-income households that can pay from savings or money that might be spent out of state.
“There is no shortage of voices making the claim that raising taxes is the worst strategy during a recession. But this conventional wisdom has little basis in fact.”
Lav says a balanced approach that balances various strategies is something state legislators should consider now. In our state’s 2010-11 budget now being developed, lawmakers face revenues of $5.1 billion – about $1.5 billion less than just two years ago. If spending stays the same as now, budget wizards at the state have to come up with $563 million just to keep thing like they are.
With an eye to the enormity of the challenges ahead, Lav’s report says budget makers should engage multiple strategies to make headway:
- Do things differently. The report says efficiencies can be gained by accelerating the release of some state prisoners – just what S.C. lawmakers are considering in a current sentencing reform proposal. State budget writers also could examine some economic tax breaks and incentives to see if they’re really working because evidence shows they don’t always do what they’re expected to – and often cost more than projected. Example: A New York study found the state could actually save millions by hiring state employees to do work being done by expensive consultants.
- Review credits, deductions and exemptions. South Carolina currently doesn’t collect more than $2.5 billion in sales taxes due to special-interest exemptions. If the state reviewed exemptions, tax credits and deductions, it likely would find some that weren’t working – and that it could turn into more revenue.
- Improve collections. Lav writes most states don’t do a good job in collecting sales tax from catalog and Internet sales. Both could be improved here.
- Prioritize. South Carolina could prioritize spending based on need – a kind of zero-based budgeting – and fund things high-priority things that it had money for. While the process is difficult, she writes, it can help restore balance.
- Modernize tax systems. The state could benefit by broadening the tax base by taxing more services. Currently, only about three dozen of 160 categories of services are taxed in South Carolina. That means some services are getting preferential treatment. A fairer way to treat businesses is to have more services taxed, which will generate additional revenue that can patch shortfalls – or (and this is a big one) reduce the sales tax rate.
- Update corporate income taxes. There are several strategies that can make corporate taxation more equitable and modern, she writes. (In the past, we’ve suggested getting rid of corporate income taxes completely, although some complained that corporations should pay something because they and their employees use roads and government services as a part of doing business.)
Bottom line: State lawmakers should scrutinize spending and employ a battery of balancing tools to deal with this year’s budget shortfalls and lean times. This should include the possibility of raising some taxes so the state can deliver needed services.
|
The Felkel Grouop The public spiritedness of our underwriters allows us to bring Statehouse Report to you at no cost. This week in the underwriter spotlight is The Felkel Group, a battle-tested public affairs and business development firm that assists corporations, associations and not-for-profits that are serious about their long-term success. The Felkel Group solves problems, crafts and delivers messages, helps organizations to manage crisis, and uses a wealth and breadth of valuable relationships tohelp to seal deals. The Felkel Group is also home to an outstanding advocacy tool called The Rap Index, a powerful intelligence tool that employs sophisticated computer modeling and profiling techniques tohelp organizations find their most effective advocates. To learn more about The Felkel Group and its Rap Index, go to: http://www.felkelgroup.com.
|
SC shouldn’t be new kind of dumping groundBy Susan Corbett
Chair, S.C. Chapter of the Sierra Club FEB. 19, 2010 -- When I was growing up in the ‘50's, I spent a lot of time at my grandmother's house in Jacksonville, Fla. She was a very wise lady, and one of her favorite adages was "waste not, want not" and she lived by that practice.  In those days, it was almost a mortal sin to throw something away. Food scraps went to the dogs, cats, or ducks and geese she raised in the backyard. Clothes were mended, and passed on to others. Broken appliances were repaired if at all possible, and little actually went into the trash. My, how things have changed. Americans have become the world's leaders in individual trash generation. We throw a LOT of stuff away. In fact, every year Americans produce 220 million tons of trash. This is equivalent to burying more than 82,000 football fields six feet deep in compacted garbage every year.. Right now, only 32 percent of it is recycled (less in South Carolina). The average European generates about 1,200 pounds of garbage a year. The average Chinese: 480 pounds per year. We Americans produce 1,600 lbs a year each. Where is all this garbage going? Does anyone even care? I think most of us forget about garbage the moment we toss it in the trash can. But the truth is all this trash is starting to pile up all over the country, and someone IS having to deal with it -- the folks living in areas where landfills are located. Recently, a large company, Covanta, came into Chester County, 60 miles south of Charlotte, and put forth a plan to "take care" of some of our garbage through a process they call "waste-to-energy." Basically this is burning garbage and using the heat to make a small amount of electricity. If this sounds too good to be true, it is, for a lot of reasons. But let’s talk about garbage a bit more. One of the tenets of conservative thought is that everyone is personally responsible for their actions and behavior. This should certainly apply to garbage. If my neighbor suddenly decides he doesn't like keeping his garbage in his own yard, and instead throws it over the fence into my yard, I wouldn't like it much. While we South Carolinians should certainly be responsible for taking care of our own garbage, the days when we would accept other states' garbage ended when we decided we didn't want to be the nuclear waste dump of the country any more. We certainly don't want to encourage other states to shirk their responsibility for their garbage by allowing them to dump it here. In order for this garbage-burning company to make any money, it will have to bring in large amounts of garbage from other states. They will burn this garbage in a mass burn incinerator that will release toxic, carcinogenic emissions. What isn't released will end up in the ash, which is also highly toxic, and must be contained, and kept from leaching into the ground water, rivers or blowing away into the air. Should we accept this toxic burden to our state's air and water when it isn't our garbage? What is needed is a national program to reduce what we throw away. People should be encouraged to compost food scraps, recycle everything that can be recycled and be mindful of buying products that are over-packaged. I started buying a lot of things in bulk, as this is not only cheaper, but reduces packaging garbage. Legislation should be passed to encourage "cradle to cradle" practices in which products are designed to be cycled back into new products, not thrown away. Companies that reduce packaging should be rewarded with incentives or tax credits. And every state should be responsible for its own waste. Why should a beautiful, rural county like Chester become a garbage dump for other states' garbage? It shouldn't. And study after study shows that programs that recycle and re-use what we throw out create many more jobs than landfills or incinerators. In a world of diminishing natural resources, we'd better find ways to recover and reuse these materials, not bury or burn then. But then, our grandparents knew the value of not being wasteful. It's an old American value we need to re-adopt.
Susan Corbett is chair of the S.C. Chapter of the Sierra Club. RECENT MY TURNS
|
Send us your thoughtsWe encourage you to submit a letter to the editor that outlines your views on an issue of public importance or as a rebuttal to something you see in Statehouse Report.
Letters policy: Letters to the editor are published weekly. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity. We generally publish all comments about South Carolina politics or policy issues, unless they are libelous or unnecessarily inflammatory. One submission is allowed per month. Submission of a comment grants permission to us to reprint. Comments are limited to 250 words or less.
|
Up, down and in the middle Tourism. Visitors now account for roughly an $18 billion economic impact annually, up from $16 billion. More.
Irony. Who takes care of the kids so First Lady Jenny Sanford can go on the talk-show circuit and bad-mouth her husband? Her husband, Gov. Mark Sanford. Mmmm … Delicious.
 Emails. Yes, they “out” hypocrites -- e.g. Sanford and Eckstrom -- but they also give pundits -- e.g. Stewart and Colbert -- unlimited fodder. Oy.
 Eckstrom. Leaving important meetings to take calls from your girlfriend … before you’re officially divorced? Who does S.C. Comptroller Richard Eckstrom thinks he is, Mark Sanford?!
 Dems. A day late commenting on the Eckstrom affair was a dollar short for the S.C. Democratic Party, which has struggled to put up full ballots of statewide candidates. Maybe now they’ll get a candidate for comptroller general.
Payday lending. Should’ve done it right the first time, General Assembly; leaving a back-door provision so some cruddy payday lenders can stay in business by changing designation only means last year’s “solution” solved nothing. More.
|
Candidate with qualifications?
|